That said, if people really think that it is an issue
This response strikes me as a bit odd.
It reminds me of calling up an ISP and reporting a service outage, only to be told, “We don’t have any reports of an outage in that service area.”
Or bringing up a newly-arisen relationship problem with a partner, only to be told, “Why didn’t you tell me!?”
Or telling someone their floral perfume is making your face swell up, only to be told, “I’ve never heard of anyone being allergic to perfume!”
For some reason, it seems that people exclude the conversation they are now having from the set of all conversations. It seems like a failure to apply the self-sampling assumption or something. Maybe it’s a short-term/long-term memory thing.
In case it’s not clear: Yes, I (who am a person) do really think that your comment above disrespects the apparent wishes of the person whose writing you’re talking about.
No, I think it’s more of an issue of refusing to generalize from a single data point. It is entirely correct to say “This conversation is a starting piece of evidence for your position, but I need to wait to gather more evidence.”
You are a person, but not all people. Not even two people. So I do not wish to act on your say so alone. That said, I will repeat my earlier statement: If people [people in general, that is] really think that it is an issue I will redact the name of his old blog.
This response strikes me as a bit odd.
It reminds me of calling up an ISP and reporting a service outage, only to be told, “We don’t have any reports of an outage in that service area.”
Or bringing up a newly-arisen relationship problem with a partner, only to be told, “Why didn’t you tell me!?”
Or telling someone their floral perfume is making your face swell up, only to be told, “I’ve never heard of anyone being allergic to perfume!”
For some reason, it seems that people exclude the conversation they are now having from the set of all conversations. It seems like a failure to apply the self-sampling assumption or something. Maybe it’s a short-term/long-term memory thing.
In case it’s not clear: Yes, I (who am a person) do really think that your comment above disrespects the apparent wishes of the person whose writing you’re talking about.
No, I think it’s more of an issue of refusing to generalize from a single data point. It is entirely correct to say “This conversation is a starting piece of evidence for your position, but I need to wait to gather more evidence.”
You are a person, but not all people. Not even two people. So I do not wish to act on your say so alone. That said, I will repeat my earlier statement: If people [people in general, that is] really think that it is an issue I will redact the name of his old blog.